1 11. PROFITABILITY EVALUATION OF NEW POWER PLANT ALTERNATIVES Asko Vuorinen.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Roles and Responsibilities network owners system operator(s) regulators Infrastructure brokers power exchange(s) Market Places generatorsconsumerssupplierstraders.
Advertisements

Financial Model.
Capital Budgeting1 Select investments which increase value of firm Maximize wealth of shareholders Important to firm’s long-term success  Substantial.
Platinum Energy, Inc. Slide No. 1 PROJECT EVALUATION Joseph A. Orlando, Ph.D, PE Platinum Energy, Inc. Springfield, Virginia
Thermoflow, Inc. TOPS stands for Thermoflow’s Optimization System and is a general purpose optimizer for use with Thermoflow’s core programs. TOPS runs.
Electrical Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran M. Poursistani N. Hajilu G. B. Gharehpetian M. Shafiei CHP Systems.
Secure System Scheduling with High Wind Penetrations J. Kennedy March 2009.
Cogeneration. Is the simultaneous production of electrical and thermal energy from a single fuel source.
Toward a Sustainable Future Name of Conference, Event, or Audience Date Presenter’s Name | ©2011 Synapse Energy Economics Inc. All.
4. Project Investment Decision-Making
Welcome to First Hydro Company 4 June First Hydro Slide 2  Approximately 200 employees across four sites  Dinorwig –the largest pumped storage.
Modeling and simulation of the Power Energy System of Uruguay in 2015 with high penetration of wind energy R. CHAER*E. CORNALINOE. COPPES Facultad de Ingeniería.
Dealing With Uncertainty
NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy operated by the Alliance for Sustainable.
How can changing a light bulb reduce greenhouse gases?
Methodologies for Quantifying Energy Security in the Power Sector William Blyth 24 th April 2005.
EE 369 POWER SYSTEM ANALYSIS
Engineering Technology Division
September 9, 2003 Lee Jay Fingersh National Renewable Energy Laboratory Overview of Wind-H 2 Configuration & Control Model (WindSTORM)
Least Cost System Operation: Economic Dispatch 1
Generation Expansion Daniel Kirschen 1 © 2011 D. Kirschen and the University of Washington.
9-0 Net Present Value and Other Investment Criteria Chapter 9 Copyright © 2013 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Overview of Energy- Environment Modeling MS&E 290: Public Policy Analysis February 22, 2005.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory Innovation for Our Energy Future * NREL July 5, 2011 Tradeoffs and Synergies between CSP and PV at High Grid Penetration.
Ludington Pumped Storage Plant and Wind Power Operational Considerations David Lapinski Consumers Energy Company June 16, 2009.
Capital Budgeting Net Present Value (NPV)
Power Grid
Sixth Northwest Conservation & Electric Power Plan Proposed Aeroderivative Combustion Turbine Planning Assumptions Jeff King Northwest Power and Conservation.
TRIBRID CONCEPT FOR ENERGY REDISTRIBUTION WITHIN TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS By Lev Britvin & Boris Schapiro ICSAT 2010, TRIBRID CONCEPT, February 26, 2010,
Energy Economics A synthetic methane plant from coal is to be constructed at a cost of $4 billion dollars. It requires 14,000 tons/day of coal (10,000.
Future Jordan Virtual Power Plant EEEMF Jordan 2015 Energy Economy & Energy Management Forum For Mena & Fourth Renewable Energy National Dialogue –Amman.
Sustainable Energy options for Northern Ireland European Studies Project.
Overview of Distributed Generation Applications June 16, 2003 Harrisburg, PA Joel Bluestein Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc.
HYDROPOWER. Objective: The student will be become familiar with the Corps policy for hydropower development. The student will be have a basic understanding.
Capital Investment Decisions
Financial evaluation 9 March Financial Feasibility Assess the ability of the utility or developer to meet the financial obligations associated with.
Renewables and System Services Ann Scully.
1 Chapter 3 Appendix B Development of Objective Function.
ECONOMICAL VIABILITY OF THE NUCLEAR OPTION IN MEXICO Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Nucleares.
Diagram from the publication
On/Off Operation of Carbon Capture Systems in the Dynamic Electric Grid On/Off Operation of Carbon Capture Systems in the Dynamic Electric Grid Rochelle.
2003 State of the Market Report ERCOT Wholesale Electricity Markets.
Electric Capacity Market Performance with Generation Investment and Renewables Cynthia Bothwell Benjamin Hobbs Johns Hopkins University Work Supported.
Generation Costs. Fuel InputProcess (Generating station) Electrical Energy output Cost of Electrical energy = Cost of fuel + processing cost.
PORTFOLIO RISK ANALYSIS BASED GENERATION EXPANSION PLANNING Presenter: Nguyen Xuan Phuc Asian Institute of Technology School of Environment, Resources.
1. FUNDAMENTALS OF POWER PLANTS
1 2. FUNDAMENTALS OF EMISSION CONTROL Asko Vuorinen.
1 12. WORLD ELECTRICITY IN THE YEAR 2050 Asko Vuorinen.
1 8. OPERATING, REACTIVE AND BLACK START RESERVES Asko Vuorinen.
1 4. PLANNING OF MUNICIPAL CHP SYSTEMS Asko Vuorinen.
1 9. BUSINESS STRATEGIES IN ELECTRICITY MARKETS Asko Vuorinen.
1 10. BUSINESS STRATEGIES IN ANCILLARY SERVICE MARKETS Asko Vuorinen.
Science A Physics – P1 Science A Physics – P1 Topic 1: Electricity Generation - 3 Topic 1: Electricity Generation - 3.
7. FREQUENCY CONTROL AND REGULATING RESERVES
By: Robert Anderson Economic Feasibility Model for Biogas Facilities in Ontario.
6. PLANNING OF POWER SYSTEM RESERVES
Diversification of Energy Power Plants in the North of Chile Matías Raby.
Argentine Power Market Fuel Oil Use & Opportunities for the Future Central Puerto S.A. Fuel Oil / Energy Buyer’s Conference Miami, September 2000.
Wood chip drying in connection with combined heat and power or solar energy in Finland Samuli Rinne Henrik Holmberg Tiina Järvinen Kaisa Kontu Sanna Syri.
Conceptual Design of 300 MW Modular Nuclear Plant Asko Vuorinen Ekoenergo Oy ASME Small and Medium Size Reactor Symposium Washington D.C. October 1st,
1 3. PLANNING OF NATIONAL POWER SYSTEMS Asko Vuorinen.
Lecture 4: Energy systems and energy technologies – Focus on economical aspects UNIK4820/9820 UNIK: 08/ Arne Lind.
Contents Introduction Focus area Wind scenarios
Dominik Franjo Dominković. , I. Bačeković, D. Sveinbjörnsson, A. S
Calculation of Payments for Renewable Energy Systems
Developing Capacity Alternatives
5. PLANNING OF SMALL AND MICRO POWER SYSTEMS
Generation Expansion Daniel Kirschen
30 Minute Reserves EPFSTF January 4,
Forecast of Nuclear Power Generation until 2100
Presentation transcript:

1 11. PROFITABILITY EVALUATION OF NEW POWER PLANT ALTERNATIVES Asko Vuorinen

2 Profitability of new power plants Contents Methodology Nuclear and wind power plants Coal power plants Gas peaking power plants Oil peaking power plants

3 Methodology Cash flow model Cash flow analysis using spread sheet forms* 1) Give annual power generation, fuel and electricity prices and investment costs 2) Program evaluates then cash flow of incomes, fuel, O&M and operating profit 3) Program calculates the net cash flow, discounted net cash flow and internal rate of return * Cash flow models are available for internet orders. See

4 Methodology Example of cash flow model

5 Methodology Discouted cash flow in example

6 Methodology Results of example In example of a 120 MW gas plant we assume Generation = 1000 GWh Electricity price = 80 eur/MWh Fuel price = 25 eur/MWh O&M price = 5 eur/MWh Investment costs = 100 Meur We will get following results Internal rate of return = 11.5 % Cumulative Discounted Cash Flow = 5.2 Meur From the diagram: Pay-back time will be 7 a

7 Methodology Assumptions In the analysis we will study additionally Energy generation in peak, intermediate and base load separately Sales of ancillary services (regulation, spinning and non-spinning reserves) After the evaluation the mode, which gives the highest internal rate of return will be selected for each power plant

8 Methodology Prices If we assume* that electricity prices are: 1) Peak load is generated 819 hours at price of 126,7 eur/MWh (= variable costs of LFO plant) 2) Intermediate load is generated 1208 hours at price 73,8 eur/MWh (= variable costs of gas plant) 3) Base load is the remaining hours at price of 47,9 eur/MWh (variable costs of coal plant) * The capacity mix is assumed to be optimal. See presentation planning of national power systems

9 Profitability of base load power plants

10 Base load power plants Performance NuclearWind OutputMW Net efficiency% 35 - Investmenteur/kW

11 Base load power plants Nuclear power plant without A/S

12 Base load power plants Nuclear power plant Nuclear plant gives high IRR = 13 % But nuclear plants need a lot of ancillary services, if the plant is the largest unit 1) Primary reserves increase by dP1 2) Secondary reserves increase by dP2 Approximate values: dP2 = (Pnuclear unit – P second largest unit)/n n = number of large nuclear units in the system dP1 = 0,8 x dP2, where 0,2 is generated by selfregulation

13 Base load power plants Nuclear power plant with A/S and transm.

Wind power plants 14

15 Base load power plants Wind power plant without A/S

16 Base load power plants Wind power plant with A/S

17 Base load power plants Wind power plant with A/S and certificates

18 Nuclear and wind power plants Summary Nuclear wind power plants may give high IRR, but consume A/S-reserves Nuclear plant needs 100 % backup within 15 secons Wind power plants need 28 % backup within 60 minutes

Coal power plants 19

20 Base load power plants Coal power plant

21 Coal power plant Coal fired plant has IRR = 5.6 % If the coal plant is the largest unit in the system, it will need A/S reserves If the coal plant is flexible, it can generate A/S reserves and increase IRR

22 Nuclear and coal power plants Flexible coal power plant with regulation

23 Flexible coal power plant with regulation Selling of regulation reserves will increase IRR from 5.6 % to 8.3 % The plant will operate at 80 % load for 5866 hours annually and offer regulation by +/- 20 % It will operate at the 100 % load for intermediate and peak hours* * Regulation reserves are generated by gas or diesel engine plants for intermediate and peak hours (2134 h/a)

24 Gas fired peaking power plants

25 Gas fired peaking power plants Performance Plant typeDual-fuel Gas EngineGas Turbine Output160 MW 160 MW160 MW Number of engines Engine outputMWe Plant outputMWe Fuel inputMWt Net efficiency%

26 Gas fired peaking power plants Gas Engine plant in energy service

27 Gas fired peaking power plants Gas Engine plant in energy service only Plant will be operated 2027 hours at full load and generates only energy IRR = 1.0 %

28 Gas fired peaking power plants GE plant with regulation and non-spinning

29 Gas fired peaking power plants GE plant with regulation and non-spinning Plant will be operated 1) 819 hours at full load and generates only energy 2) 1208 hours at 70 % load and generates energy and regulation (+/- 30 %) 3) 5973 hours at hot standby and generates non-spinning reserves Profitability IRR improves to 8.9 %

30 Gas fired peaking power plants Aeroderivative Gas Turbine plant with regulation and non-spinning

31 Gas fired peaking power plants Aeroderivative Gas Turbine plant with regulation and non-spinning Plant will be operated 1) 819 hours at full load and generates only energy 2) 1208 hours at 70 % load and generates energy and regulation (+/- 30 %) 3) 5973 hours at hot standby and generates non-spinning reserves Profitability IRR = 4.8 %

32 LFO fired peaking plant

33 LFO fired peaking plant Performance Plant typeDiesel engineDiesel engineGas turbine Output160 MW160 MW160 MW Number of engines10204 Engine outputMWe Plant outputMWe Fuel inputMWt Net efficiency%

34 LFO fired peaking plant Diesel Engine plant without A/S

35 LFO fired peaking plant Diesel Engine plant without A/S Plant operates 819 hours at 100 % load and generates only energy Without ancillary services a diesel engine plant has negative IRR

36 LFO fired peaking plant Diesel Engine plant with regulation and non-spinning

37 LFO fired peaking plant Diesel Engine plant with regulation and non-spinning The diesel engine plant produces 1) energy at 70 % load for 819 hours 2) regulation +/- 30 % for 819 hours 3) non-spinning service for 7181 hours The profitability IRR = 6.9 %

38 LFO fired peaking plant Gas turbine plant in energy service The gas turbines which cannot generate A/S services have negative cash flows* Only those GT plants which can generate non-spinning services can be profitable** *Industrial gas turbines cannot be started up in 10 minutes ** aero-derivetives can start up in 10 minutes)

39 LFO fired peaking plant GT plant with regulation and non-spinning

40 LFO fired peaking plant GT plant with regulation and non-spinning The GT plant produces 1) energy at 70 % load for 819 hours 2) regulation +/- 30 % for 819 hours 3) non-spinning service for 7181 hours The profitability IRR = 3,3 %

41 LFO fired peaking plant Summary The best operation mode for LFO plant is peaking, regulating and non-spinning service With A/S revenues the IRR of diesel engine plant becomes 7 %

42 Summary and conclusions The profitability of any type of power plant can be evaluated using cash flow models used in the presentation The best cash flow models can evaluate the infuence of ancillary services The flexible power plants, which can generate ancillary services can improve the profitability considerably

43 For details see reference text book ”Planning of Optimal Power Systems” Author: Asko Vuorinen Publisher: Ekoenergo Oy Printed: 2008 in Finland Book and programs are available at